Dyads in Organizational Research: Conceptual Issues and Multilevel Analyses

Although extensive work exists on multilevel theory building, testing and inference drawing in organizational research, work focusing on interpersonal relationships and the dyad as a level of analysis is scarcer compared to research focusing on individuals, groups/teams, and organizations. This scarcity is attributable to conceptual and methodological challenges in modeling dyads as a level of analysis. To address these challenges, we first present a discussion of the conceptualization of different dyadic configurations in work settings. Then, drawing on this conceptual treatment, we develop and illustrate the application of Random Coefficient Modeling (RCM) via nesting for independent dyads and cross-classification for dependent dyads in work settings. Across both independent and dependent dyads, we illustrate the application of Within and Between Analysis (WABA), another multilevel technique for dyadic analyses. RCM and WABA stem from differing statistical assumptions and are capable of testing different kinds of multilevel questions. We close with prescriptive implications for future multilevel conceptualization and data analysis using RCM and WABA, particularly involving interpersonal work relationships and dyads.

[1]  Paul D. Bliese,et al.  Being Both Too Liberal and Too Conservative: The Perils of Treating Grouped Data as though They Were Independent , 2004 .

[2]  J. Greenberg.  Employee Theft as a Reaction to Underpayment Inequity: The Hidden Cost of Pay Cuts , 1990 .

[3]  David A. Hofmann.  An Overview of the Logic and Rationale of Hierarchical Linear Models , 1997 .

[4]  Francis J. Yammarino,et al.  Is more discussion about levels of analysis really necessary?When is such discussion sufficient? , 2006 .

[5]  Warren C. K. Chiu,et al.  Relational schemas as sources of evaluation and misevaluation of leader–member exchanges: Some initial evidence , 2008 .

[6]  Achilles A. Armenakis,et al.  Leader–member social exchange (LMSX): development and validation of a scale , 2007 .

[7]  S. Green,et al.  In the shadow of the boss's boss: effects of supervisors' upward exchange relationships on employees. , 2007, The Journal of applied psychology.

[8]  J. Colquitt.  On the dimensionality of organizational justice: a construct validation of a measure. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[9]  J. Diefendorff,et al.  Emotional display rules and emotional labor: the moderating role of commitment. , 2005, The Journal of applied psychology.

[10]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Dyadic Data Analysis , 2006 .

[11]  Donald E. Conlon,et al.  Justice at the millennium: a meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[12]  B. Tepper,et al.  Upward Maintenance Tactics in Supervisory Mentoring and Nonmentoring Relationships , 1995 .

[13]  Paul E. Mott,et al.  The characteristics of effective organizations , 1972 .

[14]  Francis J. Yammarino,et al.  Leadership and levels of analysis: A state-of-the-science review , 2005 .

[15]  Francis J. Yammarino,et al.  Leader–member exchange, shared values, and performance: Agreement and levels of analysis do matter , 2010 .

[16]  D. Beal,et al.  An episodic process model of affective influences on performance. , 2005, The Journal of applied psychology.

[17]  M. Konovsky,et al.  Citizenship Behavior and Social Exchange , 1994 .

[18]  R. Mayer,et al.  IN MANAGEMENT , 2006 .

[19]  Anthony S. Bryk,et al.  Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods , 1992 .

[20]  C. Schriesheim,et al.  Investigating contingencies: an examination of the impact of span of supervision and upward controllingness on leader-member exchange using traditional and multivariate within- and between-entities analysis. , 2000, The Journal of applied psychology.

[21]  Francis J. Yammarino,et al.  The folly of theorizing “A” but testing “B”: A selective level-of-analysis review of the field and a detailed Leader–Member Exchange illustration , 2001 .

[22]  Yuk Fai Cheong,et al.  HLM 6: Hierarchical Linear and Nonlinear Modeling , 2000 .

[23]  J. H. Davis,et al.  An Integrative Model Of Organizational Trust , 1995 .

[24]  James M. LeBreton,et al.  Answers to 20 Questions About Interrater Reliability and Interrater Agreement , 2008 .

[25]  H. Liao,et al.  The impact of justice climate and justice orientation on work outcomes: a cross-level multifoci framework. , 2005, The Journal of applied psychology.

[26]  Kyle Lewis,et al.  Integrating Justice and Social Exchange: The Differing Effects of Fair Procedures and Treatment on Work Relationships , 2000 .

[27]  Francis J. Yammarino,et al.  Women and transformational and contingent reward leadership: A multiple-levels-of-analysis perspective. , 1997 .

[28]  D. Hofmann,et al.  The application of hierarchical linear modeling to organizational research. , 2000 .

[29]  Jeffrey R. Edwards,et al.  Regression Analysis as an Alternative to Difference Scores , 1994 .

[30]  Brent A. Scott,et al.  Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: a meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. , 2007, The Journal of applied psychology.

[31]  Thomas J. Naughton,et al.  Individualized leadership: A new multiple-level approach , 1995 .

[32]  William J. Haga,et al.  A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process , 1975 .

[33]  Jeroen K. Vermunt,et al.  Composing Group-Level Constructs From Individual-Level Survey Data , 2009 .

[34]  Charlotte R. Gerstner,et al.  Meta-Analytic Review of Leader-Member Exchange Theory: Correlates and Construct Issues , 1997 .

[35]  J. Edwards.  Ten Difference Score Myths , 2001 .

[36]  Francis J. Yammarino,et al.  On the application of within and between analysis: Are absence and affect really group-based phenomena? , 1992 .

[37]  Jeffrey R. Edwards,et al.  Alternatives to difference scores as dependent variables in the study of congruence in organizational research. , 1995 .

[38]  Lorne Campbell,et al.  Estimating Actor, Partner, and Interaction Effects for Dyadic Data Using PROC MIXED and HLM: A User–Friendly Guide , 2002 .

[39]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Consequences of violating the independence assumption in analysis of variance. , 1986 .

[40]  Alan J. Dubinsky,et al.  Transformational leadership theory: Using levels of analysis to determine boundary conditions. , 1994 .

[41]  Francis J. Yammarino,et al.  Multivariate aspects of the varient/waba approach: A discussion and leadership illustration , 1998 .

[42]  Kimberly A. Eddleston,et al.  Moderators of the Relationship Between Work-Family Conflict and Career Satisfaction , 2002 .

[43]  J. Gill.  Hierarchical Linear Models , 2005 .

[44]  P. Bliese.  Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. , 2000 .

[45]  Francis J. Yammarino,et al.  Multi-level nature of and multi-level approaches to leadership. , 2008 .